It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
"In terms of what I can bring to change the character, Bond is on a character arc that started with Casino Royale, and I will be carrying that on. There will be changes, I am sure," Fukunaga told The Inquirer. "As in any story, a character has to change in order [to have] a narrative."
First, he mentions Change of character even before he mentions CR.
Then he mentions an arc that started with CR. This could be said About any of Craig´s films.
"will be carrying that on": very ambiguous. "that" could be CR, or it could be the "arc" of the last four films.
"a character has to Change in order to have a narrative": Great, so the Connery and Moore films had no narrative? Well, what do I Need narrative for then?
I respect CF deeply for some of the Things he´s done so far (not all). But he bullshits like any other director before making a film.
Why wouldn't they have enough time? Do you know how far they've come as to scouting locations, castings, writing the script?
He's also delivering what I've been saying EON's public-facing staff need to do for a long time now: finally, someone sounds excited about making the next Bond film! For ages now it's been a bunch of weary-sounding "I don't know anything about it" or "we haven't planned anything yet" or "I guess I'd be available if they needed me" -type answers.
Hopefully CF projecting some optimism and excitement will kickstart things again.
My thoughts exactly
Does she? Who decides that then?
Damn he still looks amazing. He still could be Bond. The more i see him, the more I wish he still made more films
...........and we're back.
Panchito does, I think. I could be wrong though.
It would be naive to think Craig's big finish would be standalone after SP. They'd have to bookend the era how they began it. As long as they do it with some sense of quality, I'll consider the era an admirably ambitious if slightly unfulfilling experiment.
I'd use less generous adjectives to describe it, but we are where we are and it is what it is.
Fukunaga is the only positive in this whole affair at present, and I think he has what it takes to deliver something interesting and worthwhile. At the very least he should be able to inject a sense of style into the whole thing, no matter what narrative direction they take.
The length of the era is the not the admirably ambitious part.
Yes, my hopes went out the window long ago, for Bond 25 to be a success in its current state. My expectations are very reserved. My only real desire is that they finally get the gunbarrel right this time, with no silly title cards.
Silly title cards?
"The Dead Are Alive" or whatever. It seems like they are always doing something to mess up the gunbarrel, I would just like then to get it right for once.
Active imaginations
Figured as much. It's no wonder I've made the BOND COMMENTS and BOND RANKINGS threads my home away from home.
Oh, then I want that too.
The headline is "story arc" but Fukunaga's quote is "character arc." There's a big difference.
As an example, in B25 Bond could be dealing with the aftermath of his relationship with Swann without having extended scenes or plotlines with her or Blofeld. That's character.
It doesn't bother me that he talks about Bond's vulnerability. Craig is best in those moments so he should go for that. CR did the best in balancing Bond's vulnerability and joie-de-vivre, SF second-best. I hope they find that balance again.
I'm not really quite sure what to say to this that would be any different to me repeating the comment I said above. The length of the era (be it 2 years, 4 years or 15) doesn't really hold any bearing on the quality of the content of the films themselves, which is what I was referring to. Not the concept of time, which is what you mixed in there. Does that make Lazenby's era the most fulfilling or the least fulfilling, then? Or Moore's?
If you find it massively unfulfilling as opposed to my somewhat polite "slightly" (my issues are limited solely to SPECTRE now, I like the other three), then just say that instead of faffing about, please.
An admirable failure is still admirable nonetheless. I used the word ambitious, not successful.
But I guess arguments have been started over a lot less around here recently, so I digress.
Anyway, Bond 25 is still on track. The overactive, trolling imaginations of some of the lesser folk here won't make that statement any less true until EON confirms it any other way.
Exactly.
Fukunaga's film will be as straightforward as QoS, if it were to be "straightforward". One also shouldn't read too much into that "arc" thing. All he meant was that it was going to continue the timeline established in CR, lightly keeping in touch with the previous four films while being its own thing. Why are you lot thinking it's going to be a continuation of the prior melodrama?
It's impossible to "literally" polish dialogue. How would that work exactly? They break out a can of polish and rub it on the script?